If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Being used to the Hobart welders (HH140 & 210), I found the rear switch on the Multimatic 200 inconvenient at first. Now, I find myself looking for the switch in the rear for my AirForce 250 plasma cutter and then remembering...it's in the front. I'm so confused!

In some cases the reason could be a simple lack of space on the front panel to properly locate a power switch. Another possibility is that routing the leads through the unit could cause problems with weld performance because of noise on the lines in particular on inverter based units. In other cases the size of the machine itself may not allow for proper clearances for the primary leads to be routed through the length of the unit and still pass a 3rd party certification such as NRTL/C, CSA or UL. These types of certifications are very important for this equipment, without them we would not be allowed to sell in some markets.

OK But none of those applies to the 211. Did you look at the pics I posted?

Originally Posted by Miller Kevin

As for relocating the switch on the Millermatic 211 to the front panel I would not recommend it as it could be a potential safety issue and would also jeopardize your machine warranty.

Drinking lemonade near the welder is a potential safety issue. Using an auto-darkening lens instead of a true shade is a potential safety issue. Welding is a potential safety issue.

The point is: if Miller built the machine with the switch on the front, it would be as safe as anything else about the machine. So the safest thing for Miller customers is for Miller to revise that design so we don't have to do it ourselves. If it takes a relay in the back & a low-current switch on the front, DO that. Personally, I don't think that's necessary on the 211. I think longer factory wires would pass any standard of safety & performance. What are we talking about - another $1-30 worth of parts on a $1000 machine?

Originally Posted by jimcolt

The switch has to be closw to the power cord entrance so long lengths of input AC power are not exposed inside the unit.

I don't doubt for a moment that you know what you're talking about, and that there's some regulation mandating your switch location. But you worded that wrong... "Exposed inside" doesn't make sense. Wires inside a machine case are less-exposed than those outside, so if a long power wire is an issue, the external cord would be the larger problem.

Here's another cheap effective solution: the electrical switch can be at the back safely certified INSIDE the case, and a safe certifiable inexpensive pushrod mechanism can link it to a front-panel button/knob. Home stereo amps have been built that way for decades.

Here's another cheap effective solution: the electrical switch can be at the back safely certified INSIDE the case, and a safe certifiable inexpensive pushrod mechanism can link it to a front-panel button/knob. Home stereo amps have been built that way for decades.

Your right Steve, they could do that. But they don't...and I'm sure it is because a mix of all the reasons listed in this thread. Mostly I'm sure the bean counters would not authorize that costly of a modification (only a few bucks), auto manufactures have engineers quibble over fasteners which cost cents, and that is for a 20k+ vehicle. Surely $1-3 of parts on a $900 welder is out of the question, especially if it is not necessary.

Also, I would be more frustrated if that front switch failed because some janky remote rod system had been implemented, instead of just putting a regular switch located somewhere else on the machine.

I don't necessarily like the rear switch or anything, but I understand the world we have created. Safety concerns and cost of manufacturing are often the two predominant traits when developing a product.